Re: What direction I think Uncharted 4 multiplayer should take.

That's also something I don't get. Where's the lawbook of shooters that dictates everything should be ineffective anything that isn't an actual gun should be worthless. Most shooters, I'm sure you can name a bunch that aren't most likely, do have melee in them and a lot of them are 1-hit kills usuall with a knife or something.

I'm not saying every shooter should have melee exactly, but like if it does have melee, then what's the big deal with it being even the least bit effective?

Re: What direction I think Uncharted 4 multiplayer should take.

That's also something I don't get. Where's the lawbook of shooters that dictates everything should be ineffective anything that isn't an actual gun should be worthless. Most shooters, I'm sure you can name a bunch that aren't most likely, do have melee in them and a lot of them are 1-hit kills usuall with a knife or something.

I'm not saying every shooter should have melee exactly, but like if it does have melee, then what's the big deal with it being even the least bit effective?

Well these mechanics have now got to a point where they have surpassed shooting. Where as once the mechanic was so weak in games that it was almost forgotten about as a way of killing an enemy. Devs have abused the mechanic, pushing it to the point where Naughty Dog themselves now see melee and blindfire as a legitimate "playstyle".

A shooting game that has a playstyle where you can convincingly win by not even aiming your gun, is rediculous imo.

It has damaged the infrustructure of shooters and has lead to players unable to shoot a target. They're so dependent on melee that it becomes the only way to get their kills because so little practice time is put into actually learning to aim. I don't see this as the players fault, if a game rewards you for pressing one button to get a kill, rather than having to aim at a target and shoot them several times to kill them, what is the majority going to choose? The main problem though is that it stunts the players growth in fully understanding the game. They will remain stuck at that level and never able to progress further.

It's frustrating to go against players who are 5 meters away and will literally run at you holding down R1. There's no fear, no thought that this is last resort, it's got to a point where this strategy will successfully yeild results most of the time.

In the last console generation you had a basic rifle butt melee animation. In most games it was clumsy, slow and barely did much damage to the target. This is something you would do if you ran out of ammo or had tried every other way to kill the target. In most circumstances you would still get killed because guess what the target had a gun.

This generation, shooters are pushing to becoming so inclusive they bend over backwards to cater to everyone. In my day you started off getting your **bleep** handed to you and it was down to you to get better. Now we have the equivalent of an always on auto pilot that does all the work for you. All you have to do is look in the right direction and reap the rewards.

Re: What direction I think Uncharted 4 multiplayer should take.

nicolepwned wrote:^ Sabotage kickbacks? Sounds enticing, what do you mean?

When mean sabotage kickbacks I mean kickbacks that effect the enemy instead of your and your team, I guess in Uncharted 3 those kickbacks are Disruption and Cursed Idol. I'd like to see my character punch the ground causing an earthquake effect which stuns the enemy in close proximity, I'd like to see a kickback that is similar to cursed Idol but causes the enemy to lose health if they walk into it.

It would be cool to have more kickbacks like this instead of power weapon ones.

Re: What direction I think Uncharted 4 multiplayer should take.

That's also something I don't get. Where's the lawbook of shooters that dictates everything should be ineffective anything that isn't an actual gun should be worthless. Most shooters, I'm sure you can name a bunch that aren't most likely, do have melee in them and a lot of them are 1-hit kills usuall with a knife or something.

I'm not saying every shooter should have melee exactly, but like if it does have melee, then what's the big deal with it being even the least bit effective?

Well these mechanics have now got to a point where they have surpassed shooting. Where as once the mechanic was so weak in games that it was almost forgotten about as a way of killing an enemy. Devs have abused the mechanic, pushing it to the point where Naughty Dog themselves now see melee and blindfire as a legitimate "playstyle".

A shooting game that has a playstyle where you can convincingly win by not even aiming your gun, is rediculous imo.

It has damaged the infrustructure of shooters and has lead to players unable to shoot a target. They're so dependent on melee that it becomes the only way to get their kills because so little practice time is put into actually learning to aim. I don't see this as the players fault, if a game rewards you for pressing one button to get a kill, rather than having to aim at a target and shoot them several times to kill them, what is the majority going to choose? The main problem though is that it stunts the players growth in fully understanding the game. They will remain stuck at that level and never able to progress further.

It's frustrating to go against players who are 5 meters away and will literally run at you holding down R1. There's no fear, no thought that this is last resort, it's got to a point where this strategy will successfully yeild results most of the time.

In the last console generation you had a basic rifle butt melee animation. In most games it was clumsy, slow and barely did much damage to the target. This is something you would do if you ran out of ammo or had tried every other way to kill the target. In most circumstances you would still get killed because guess what the target had a gun.

This generation, shooters are pushing to becoming so inclusive they bend over backwards to cater to everyone. In my day you started off getting your **bleep** handed to you and it was down to you to get better. Now we have the equivalent of an always on auto pilot that does all the work for you. All you have to do is look in the right direction and reap the rewards.

/Rant

Well melee can be great in shooters and not ridiculously useless or overpowered either. Last MP game I played to death was MGO. And you literally can create a playstyle fully devoted to cqc and knifing. It wasn't cheap and it took skill and effort to get melee kills/kos in that game. Thats just a highlight on how melee can be done correctly.

I know how gaming is now yea, I personally see it as disappointing myself that games in the past few years, hell this whole gen. of gaming was a huge wave of disappointment with only a few glimmers. But I'm personally not one to attack a game based on the features or mechanics of it, as long as it works and I find some enjoyment out of it, then whats the problem.

I mean when it comes down to it, its a video game and the point is to have fun. Trying to change the game into another game too fit your style of fun is a bit weird.

Re: What direction I think Uncharted 4 multiplayer should take.

Well melee can be great in shooters and not ridiculously useless or overpowered either. Last MP game I played to death was MGO. And you literally can create a playstyle fully devoted to cqc and knifing. It wasn't cheap and it took skill and effort to get melee kills/kos in that game. Thats just a highlight on how melee can be done correctly.

I know how gaming is now yea, I personally see it as disappointing myself that games in the past few years, hell this whole gen. of gaming was a huge wave of disappointment with only a few glimmers. But I'm personally not one to attack a game based on the features or mechanics of it, as long as it works and I find some enjoyment out of it, then whats the problem.

I mean when it comes down to it, its a video game and the point is to have fun. Trying to change the game into another game too fit your style of fun is a bit weird.

Wish I played MGO but I can't comment on that. From the style of that series I doubt you could run straight at a dude and knife him. It would take skill in being stealthy on approach and I will accept that as a valid use of melee. Though wasn't it like a button promt for a stealth kill, rather than just flailing your arms about near a target?

True, took me awhile but when you realise that even if you spend two years playing a game, it belongs to you as much as it belongs to someone who's never touched a videogame. As a fan it's a fruitless task trying to push major changes to a multiplayers core mechanics as it only ends in frustration. At the end of the day it's designed by the dev team and you either decide to play their vision of a multiplayer or move onto another game.

I see no issue with expressing your views about a game on the forums though. The point of a multiplayer forum is to discuss topics and give feedback. The best you can hope for is that the direction will change in the next game or that another game will come along that better suites the type of experience you want to have.

Right now I think across the Sony line we're starved in games that offer a highly skilled competitive multiplayer experience.

It seems that the first multiplayer in a series gives a hint of that if you look back at UC2, resistance and killzone 2 but that gets completely stomped out by the sequel.

Re: What direction I think Uncharted 4 multiplayer should take.

In my opinion, and don't take this the wrong way, they are not aiming to attract more competitive players. They want to try appeal to as many people as possible through co-op, competitive and even casual playlists and fanbases. Sony will most likely say no to making this game a purely competitive game that some people want.

I'll put it this way, they will most likely aim to appeal to casual players but they will also most likely want to also appeal to passionate long-term fans, people that will play the game for a long while. This can include people that are competitive but also those that are not as competitive (they don't care about competition, they don't care about being in clans, they play for the sake of playing however they play much longer than how a casual plays) but still play the MP.

If they are smart they should try not to make too many changes and additions for UC4, try to at least keep the system design as simple as possible while offering a more polished experience.

If they were to use the UC3 MP as a base for UC4, the following should be done to appeal to long-term fans:

- Remove the powerplays, introduce more variety in powerplays or regut powerplays to make sure the winning team do not get such a disadvantage. One idea someone suggested on the facebook group would be when a powerplay activates the treasure chests or treasure drops could offer additional points to the tally. If however you can't do more variety or a rethink on how they work, please scrap it.

- Less focus on aggressive kickbacks and more focus on offering defensive kickbacks. Aggressive kickbacks should be of a higher cost and not offer such a huge advantage, quickboom annoys both competitive and casual players for those that DON'T have it equipped. If you can introduce some creative kickbacks such as maybe an RPG that when fired that area could omit the same effects as cursed then go for it.

- Improved graphics and customizaton. Especially for the MP.

- More QA to make sure each gun, booster, kickback and any element is considered balanced.

- Improve the aim mechanics such as reducing the recoil across all guns, make it easier for people to aim and shoot.

- Team Objectives and co-op should have separate game modes within the playlist to introduce more variety.